Friday, August 24, 2012

The Immaterial Physical World

For centuries the prevailing western worldview has been built upon the
materialistic, mechanical model of Isaac Newton - a clockwork Universe composed
of separate particles of matter interacting according to precise physical laws
and existing within objective dimensions of space and time.This model has long succeeded in describing
many facets of our multi-faceted reality, but increasingly since the
revelations of Einstein and the paradigm-crushing implications of quantum
physics, Newton’s world is quietly fading from view and being replaced by a
more spiritual science.

“Up until the present, biology and physics have been handmaidens of
views espoused by Isaac Newton, the father of modern physics … These, at their
essence, created a world view of separateness.Newton
described a material world in which individual particles of matter followed
certain laws of motion through space and time – the universe as a machine … The
Newtonian world might have been law-abiding, but ultimately it was a lonely,
desolate place.The world carried on,
one vast gearbox, whether we were present or not … Our self-image grew even
bleaker with the work of Charles Darwin.His theory of evolution is of a life that is random, predatory,
purposeless and solitary.Be the best or
don’t survive.You are no more than an
evolutionary accident … These paradigms – the world as a machine, man as
survival machine – have led to a technological mastery of the universe, but
little real knowledge of any central importance to us.On a spiritual and metaphysical level, they
have led to the most desperate and brutal sense of isolation.They also have got us no closer to understanding
the most fundamental mysteries of our own being:how we think, how life begins, why we get
ill, how a single cell turns into a fully formed person, and even what happens
to human consciousness when we die.”-Lynne McTaggart, “The Field: The Quest for the Secret Force of the
Universe,” (XXIV-XXV)

Newton’s
mechanistic, mathematical model is attractive with its law-abiding, predictable
structure, but it repeatedly falls short in describing a wide array of
phenomena which “classical physics” is thus forced to deny or ignore.These include things such as consciousness,
the observer effect, the measurement problem, Heisenberg’s uncertainty
principle, nonlocality and quantum entanglement, particle/wave duality,
bilocation, telepathy, psychokinesis, clairvoyance, precognition,
out-of-body experiences, near-death experiences, ghosts, shamanic/spiritual
healing, acupuncture, prayer, the placebo effect, psychoneuroimmunology and
many more anomalies, all of which are at odds with classical physics and will
be examined in the coming chapters.

“The
world view which was changed by the discoveries of modern physics had been
based on Newton’s
mechanical model of the universe. This model constituted the solid framework of
classical physics. It was indeed a most formidable foundation supporting, like
a mighty rock, all of science and providing a firm basis for natural philosophy
for almost three centuries.The stage of
the Newtonian universe, on which all physical phenomena took place, was the
three-dimensional space of classical Euclidean geometry. It was an absolute
space, always at rest and unchangeable. In Newton’s own words, ‘Absolute space, in its
own nature, without regard to anything external, remains always similar and
immovable.’ All changes in the physical world were described in terms of a
separate dimension, called time, which again was absolute, having no connection
with the material world and flowing smoothly from the past through the present
to the future. ‘Absolute, true, and mathematical time,’ said Newton, ‘of itself and by its own nature,
flows uniformly, without regard to anything external.”-Fritjof Capra, “The Tao of Physics” (55)

The first
steps away from Newtonian physics came with Einstein’s theory (and subsequent experimental
proofs) of relativity showing Newton
to be incorrect in his view of absolute space and absolute time.Instead, both space and time have proven to
be relativistic, interrelated concepts which are now more appropriately
referred to as “space-time.”As written
by physicist Mendel Sachs, “The real revolution that came with Einstein’s
theory . . . was the abandonment of the idea that the space-time coordinate
system has objective significance as a separate physical entity. Instead of
this idea, relativity theory implies that the space and time coordinates are
only the elements of a language that is used by an observer to describe his
environment.”Einstein showed that
space and time are not absolute structures with independent a priori existence
as classical physics espouses.In fact,
space and time are relativistic and subjective, a notion which metaphysically
places them subordinate to the mind/consciousness perceiving them!The mystical implications of this discovery
are vast and will be covered in detail later, but first let’s examine
whether or not we even live in a “material” universe at all.What has modern physics discovered about
atoms, the so-called building blocks of matter?

“For two
thousand years it was believed that atoms were tiny solid balls – a model
clearly drawn from everyday experience. Then, as physicists discovered that atoms
were composed of more elementary, sub-atomic particles (electrons, protons,
neutrons and suchlike) the model shifted to one of a central nucleus surrounded
by orbiting electrons – again a model based on experience.An atom may be small, a mere billionth of an
inch across, but these sub-atomic particles are a hundred thousand times
smaller still. Imagine the nucleus of an atom magnified to the size of a grain
of rice. The whole atom would then be the size of a football stadium, and the
electrons would be other grains of rice flying round the stands. As the early
twentieth-century British physicist Sir Arthur Eddington put it, ‘matter is
mostly ghostly empty space’ – 99.9999999% empty space, to be a little more
precise.”-Peter Russell, “From Science to God”

How
can something which is 99.9999999% empty space be considered the building block
of matter? And what is the fundamental
“stuff” of the universe if not matter?If
there is almost no substance to our seemingly solid, tangible world, what
causes the illusion?German physicist Hans-Peter
Dürr keenly noted, “Matter is not made of matter.” So what is it made of?

“For a start, what we perceive to be 'physical' and 'solid' is
anything but. Science says that what we see as 'form' - people, buildings,
landscape etc. - are made of atoms. Okay, but the trouble with the 'solid
world' theory is that atoms are not solid. More than that, they are basically
empty. How can something that is not solid create a solid environment? It
can't. Atoms consist of electrons orbiting a nucleus (protons and neutrons),
but it is the proportions that tell the story. Atoms are more than 99% empty space to our human reality, yet they are
described as the fundamental building-blocks of matter - yes, 'solid' matter.”
–David Icke, “The David Icke Guide to the Global Conspiracy” (34)

“Examine
each part of the cabin. The walls are made of wood. What makes wood what it is?
A configuration of wood cells exists as a log, and each of these cells cannot
exist without a configuration of molecules. Likewise, each molecule is composed
of atoms. Each atom contains electrons, protons, and neutrons. Each atomic
particle is composed of quarks, etc., etc., etc. Everything can be broken down
into parts. Even if somehow a ‘thing’ was found that could not be broken down,
it would still have parts because if it did not, it could not be used to make
more complex things. Anything that has spatial extent requires that it has a
front, a back, a shape – different parts.At the level of atoms, the distance from one atom to another in
relationship to the diameter of the nucleus of the atom is ‘astronomical.’
There is more emptiness in the atoms composing the wall of a cabin than there
is matter! And this goes for all matter.All matter is mostly emptiness … What prevents your hand, for example,
from passing through a wall is not that there is some ‘thing’ or ‘things’
(atoms) in the way, but more so because there is an atomic energy field that
prevents the atoms from one’s hand to pass by the atoms of the wall.”
–Aaron G. L. Adoni, “The Gnosis of Kali Yuga” (137)

When
touching a wall with your hand, both the wall and your hand are composed of 99.9999999%
empty space, so your sensation of touching some “thing” comes not from
physically colliding hand-atoms with wall-atoms, but rather from an energetic
charge between them.That energetic
charge is then electro-chemically interpreted by your brain into your felt
experience of “wall.”

“How
can something that is not solid be the building blocks that construct this
'solid' wall I am looking at now? It can't - our brains do it.With the emergence of quantum physics,
science has had to concede that atoms are not solid … The atoms that comprise
'physical' matter are overwhelmingly 'empty' and even illustrations of this are
misleading because there is not enough room in a book or science paper to
accurately depict the proportions of particles to 'empty space'. As one writer
put it: 'If an atom was the size of a cathedral, the nucleus would be about the
size of a ten cent piece.’The rest is
‘empty’ to the perception of the five senses because it consists of energy
vibrating on wavelengths higher than the 'physical', and even the particles are
found to be empty as you go deeper into the subatomic realm. If you magnify
anything powerfully enough and go deeper than the atom, you will find that
nothing has solidity - No, not even buildings, cars, mountains or the bones in
your body. It's Illusion! If you find this hard to accept, think of your
dreams. You dream in three-dimensional images and yet no one claims they are
solid do they?” –David Icke, “Infinite Love is the Only Truth, Everything
Else is Illusion” (40)

“Quantum
theory thus reveals an essential interconnectedness of the universe. It shows
that we cannot decompose the world into independently existing smallest units.
As we penetrate into matter, we find that it is made of particles, but these
are not the ‘basic building blocks’ in the sense of Democritus and Newton. They are merely
idealizations which are useful from a practical point of view, but have no
fundamental significance.”-Fritjof Capra, “The Tao of Physics”
(137)

Nobel
Prize winning physicist Niels Bohr was the inventor of the Bohr Atom Model seen
in every high-school physics/chemistry textbook depicting the atom as a mini
solar system with a central nucleus orbited by bands of electrons.He created this model of the atom with which
we are all so familiar, yet he himself knew the model was incorrect at a
fundamental level.He wrote that, “Isolated
material particles are abstractions, their properties being definable and
observable only through their interaction with other systems.”In other words, no atom or sub-atomic
particle has an isolated, separate existence.No material particle has independent properties or location as distinct
from any other.At the atomic and
subatomic levels, no “thing” is separate from every “thing” else – there is
just One field of pulsating energy that composes the entire physical universe.It has been called The Ether, The Field, The
Quantum Field, The Zero-Point Field, and many other names, all referring to
this essential, energetic Oneness.So,
not only was Newton’s
classical physics incorrect about absolute space and time, it was incorrect
about the universe being composed of separate particles of matter.

“This world of separate should have been laid waste once and for all
by the discovery of quantum physics in the early part of the twentieth
century.As the pioneers of quantum
physics peered into the very heart of matter, they were astounded by what they
saw. The tiniest bits of matter aren’t
even matter, as we know it, not even a set something, but sometimes one thing,
sometimes something quite different.And
even stranger, they are often many possible things all at the same time.But most significantly, these subatomic
particles have no meaning in isolation, but only in relationship with
everything else.At its most elemental,
matter cannot be chopped up into self-contained little units, but is completely
indivisible.You can only understand the
universe as a dynamic web of interconnection. Things once in contact remain always in
contact through all space and all time.Indeed, time and space themselves appear to be arbitrary constructs, no
longer applicable at this level of the world.Time and space as we know them do not, in fact, exist.All that appears, as far as the eye can see,
is one long landscape of the here and now.”-Lynne McTaggart, “The Field: The Quest for the Secret Force of the
Universe,” (XXV)

Everyone
knows Einstein’s famous formula E=MC2 meaning Energy = Mass x Light
Speed squared.What we’re seldom taught,
however, are the implications of this equation.E=MC2 shows that matter and energy are really just two
different forms of the same thing.Einstein’s
formula and quantum physics have both verified that all matter is really just
energy vibrating at a low frequency.This means that energy, the One undifferentiated field of quantum
zero-point energy, is the primary reality; So-called “empty” space, “solid” matter,
and “separate” forms, are just subjective interpretations of the One underlying
energy.As Albert Einstein himself said,
“We may therefore regard matter as being constituted by the regions of space
in which the field is extremely intense … There is no place in this new kind of
physics both for the field and matter, for the field is the only reality.”

“The
discovery that mass is nothing but a form of energy has forced us to modify our
concept of a particle in an essential way. In modern physics, mass is no longer
associated with a material substance, and hence particles are not seen as
consisting of any basic ‘stuff’, but as bundles of energy.”-Fritjof Capra, “The Tao of Physics” (202)

Experiments
in quantum physics have shown that atoms and all subatomic particles are more
like verbs than nouns.They are more
like energy bundles or patterns of quantum potential than they are like solid
billiard balls or mini solar systems.The underlying primary reality is the energy field, and “energy” itself is
more a verb, an action, a potential, than a noun – it’s not some set “thing.” When we peer deeply into the subatomic levels
of matter, we see only this energy, this constantly flowing, interacting
field.To make sense of it we create
nouns/models like atoms, electrons, quarks, but the most appropriate “model”
would be a verb, like “universal energizing.”

“These
dynamic patterns, or ‘energy bundles’, form the stable nuclear, atomic and
molecular structures which build up matter and give it its macroscopic solid
aspect, thus making us believe that it is made of some material substance. At
the macroscopic level, this notion of substance is a useful approximation, but
at the atomic level it no longer makes sense. Atoms consist of particles and
these particles are not made of any material stuff. When we observe them, we
never see any substance; what we observe are dynamic patterns continually
changing into one another - a continuous dance of energy.”-Fritjof Capra, “The Tao of Physics” (203)

“Prior to Einstein’s theory of relativity and quantum physics we
held a firm conviction that the universe was composed of solid matter.We believed that the basic building blocks of
this material universe were atoms, which we perceived as compact and
indestructible.The atoms existed in
three-dimensional space and their movements followed certain fixed laws.Accordingly, matter evolved in an orderly
way, moving from the past, through the present, into the future.Within this secure, deterministic viewpoint
we saw the universe as a gigantic machine … Within this image of the universe
developed by Newtonian science, life, consciousness, human beings, and creative
intelligence were seen as accidental by-products that evolved from a dazzling array
of matter.As complex and fascinating as
we might be, we humans were nevertheless seen as being essentially material
objects – little more than highly developed animals or biological thinking
machines.Our boundaries were defined by
the surface of our skin, and consciousness was seen as nothing more than the
product of that thinking organ known as the brain.”-Stanislav Grof, “The Holotropic Mind,”
Harper, (4)

On a metaphysical level, the Newtonian worldview has instilled a common
belief that all life, consciousness, and the diversity of nature are merely
serendipitous accidents evolving out of complex interactions between particles
of physical matter.The idea that life, consciousness,
and the complexity of nature arose by accident, for holistic thinkers, seems
like a ludicrous improbability.But for
so-called logical, scientific thinkers, this worldview has long-standing merit.Many are happy to accept that space, time,
and matter all spontaneously came from nowhere for no reason; that a sneezing
singularity expanded and evolved through trial and error and survival of the
fittest over billions of years.At some
point, somehow, life and consciousness arose from non-living, unconscious
matter, then continued gaining complexity through time until humanity, the
pinnacle of billions of years of mechanical evolution, emerged with all these perceptions,
sensations, emotions, and internal experiences just by accident.

“Traditional science holds the belief that organic matter and life
grew from the chemical ooze of the primeval ocean solely through the random
interactions of atoms and molecules.Similarly, it is argued that matter was organized into living cells, and
cells into complex multicellular organisms with central nervous systems, solely
by accident and ‘natural selection.’And
somehow, along with these explanations, the assumption that consciousness is a
by-product of material processes occurring in the brain has become one of the
most important metaphysical tenets of the Western worldview.As modern science discovered the profound
interactions between creative intelligence and all levels of reality, this
simplistic image of the universe becomes increasingly untenable.The probability that human consciousness and
our infinitely complex universe could have come into existence through the
random interactions of inert matter has aptly been compared to that of a
tornado blowing through a junkyard and accidentally assembling a 747 jumbo jet.”-Stanislav Grof, “The Holotropic Mind” (5)

“Many
processes certainly appear to be explainable in approximately mechanistic,
reductionistic terms.But as physicists
have delved progressively deeper into the nature of reality, they find that it
cannot be understood in mechanistic terms.Mechanism assumes that there are separate objects that interact in
determined, causal ways.But that’s not
the reality we live in.Quantum reality
is holistic, and as such any attempt to study its individual pieces will give
an incomplete picture.It’s like
studying atoms inside an acorn in an attempt to understand the emergence of
leaves on an oak tree – a futile exercise.”-Dean Radin, “Entangled Minds” (222)

very interesting article Eric. I am also looking at how the 'thinking mind' which became possessed of itself--which I will explain in a moment---began looking around and objectifying all ots limited perception fell on, such as his very own body, and nature (ie., his nature), and the natural world, and that this 'thinking mind' came about into a very anceint mythology--Lunar mythology, which saw the universe and earth as being like a Great Cosmic Mother, and thus the 'thinker' ( male thinker) equated his body, nature, and the natural world with the feminine, and went like this--using his conceptual analytical knife created the conceptual categories of 'male' and 'female' and thought that the former must be superior to the latter, and he did the same dissecting with light and dark, good and bad, pure and impure, life and death, nature and spirit etc etc, making sure that only one part of his conceptual dissection was superior to the other 'part'--hence light versus dark, life versus death, pure versu7s impure, spirit versus nature etc etc etc. Not REAL~izing that in reality these 'things' he is looking at with his thinking mind, and objectifying are not independent entities that have real existence apart from each other, but are dynamic whole processes!So this is actually seen in the submicrosopic world where particles are 'seen' but they are not independent but are 'part' of a 'field'. ...But a mis-take then would be to assume or think that there is 'only field' when actuall 'particle' and 'field' are parts we have abstracted with our dissecting minds.Why I said above 'the thinking mind becomes possessed with itself' and why I put commas around 'thinking mind': well it is exactly that. The thinking mind dissociated itself from its deeper being, and from then on is possessed of ITSELF and can only then ever be utterly limited and superficial literally. Descartes is a good example, and a very dangerous one--showing you the evil that this dissociation can cause, IS causing and is continuing to destroy the very fabric of life in its ignore-ant arrogant action.

Great comment Muz, thanks for sharing. You're right about duality... duality is necessary for breadth of experience. Without evil, there can be no "good." Without pain, there can be no felt experience of "pleasure." Everything is defined by and dependent on it's opposite, without which there can be neither. Male cannot exist without female, yin cannot exist without yang.

Some of the subjects about ghosts and near death experience's involving tunnels to heaven did not resonate with me too well but the rest of the book blew my mind dude!

I share things I have learned with co-workers and people I meet and while most of them call me crazy, I can tell some of them are very intrigued. I am recommending this book to anyone who shows an interest.

Do you (or anybody) have any more book suggestions for newbies like me? I am a dumbass and have trouble understanding the subjects non-duality and our ego. Even though I have read The book by Alan Watts and other articles talking about the ego, I am still lost :(

I am reading "the doors of perception" by Huxley right now. And plan on reading some books by Graham Hancock.

Thanks Dinson! Glad to hear most of the book blew your mind. What is it about various people's NDE's that didn't resonate with you? I've read hundreds of accounts and watched hundreds more and the consistency across all ages, history, cultures, and beliefs is astonishing.

As for other book recommendations, definitely anything by Alan Watts or Graham Hancock is great (try "Supernatural"). Have you read "A Dangerous Book" by Roger Stephens? That's a really good one. Thanks for sharing and recommending my book to your co-workers! Peace

I don't know about the whole book, but the part you present here is quite precise, well backed up and clever in the conclusions!

From the promo video I have the impression that it could be too New Age-ish for my taste - this "oneness" paradigm just doesn't line up with the ancient spritiual transmissions that are important for me, like the Bhagavad Gita, but parts of the New Testament as well.

But if its all on the level of that chapter, I should definitely read it ;-)

Thanks for the comment Chaukee! I've spent the morning reading your excellent blog. Keep up the great work you're doing there! As for your New Age concerns, I'll admit that I am a vegan anarchist pranayama yoga teacher ... but I'm NOT an indigo crystal love and light ascension ashtar command law of attraction secret positive-thinking pleadian galactic federation of light entity channeling new ager. Nor will you find any of that bunk in my book. Judging by what I've read on your blog today, I think you would thoroughly enjoy Spiritual Science :) Peace

Hey, thanks for the tip Anonymous, I'll do that. And thanks for the support Chaukee! I'll be very curious to dialogue with you about the book, be sure to message me with any questions, comments, or criticisms either here or ericdubay@hotmail.com Peace!

Hey Anonymous, I added a search bar at the top, I'm not sure if/how adsense is linked to it though, there was no option I could find to connect it to adsense unless it already is automatically. Anyway, thanks for the suggestion!

i dont think that is the Google Adsense search box--if it were it would have the Google logo--unless you went in manually to remove it.

hint: its easier for readers to use the search box if its at the very top (i.e., they would use it more=more $$$) you would see BOTH the search box AND the masonic signs without scrolling downbut--if the box is further down, plus its blended in with the same background color, its likelier to be missed. or, use some of that space on the left hand column!;)

Very small free roaming particles lifetime very short.[free photons, free notron, free proton,freeelectron ,vs].And their lifetime is its energy Mc2. Protons are observed to be stable and their theoretical minimum half-life is 1x10'36 years.Grand unified theories generally predict. That protondecay should take place, although experiments so far have only resulted in a lower limit 10'35 years for proton's lifetime. I see that. The earth lifetime is its Mc'2 energy. When this is calculatedthe lifetime of earth.

Earth Mass= 5.97x10'24 kg. the lifetime 1 kg of mass in space is 2851927903,26 years.

Earth Lifetime is 1.7x10'34 years. I think that, this is a very interesting result. Thanks.